To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

MIKE DE LA PENA
By MIKE PARFIT Editor
Mike de la Pena, president of United Mexican-American Students, (UMAS), sat in a small back room in the annex to the Center for Social Action. Behind him a window looked out on a full parking lot. In front of him a clutter of papers lay on a battered desk. One of the documents was the list of demands presented to the administration by the Black Students Union and UMAS. He spoke in a tired monologue.
“I’ll tell you one thing,” he said. “I’m a brown racist. I’m prejudiced against all whites. I do not discriminate against them. Only when I feel that there is a mutual prejudice do I discriminate.
“I have faith and confidence in my people. I have an undying love for them and an undying will to organize them. I want to dedicate my life to working for my people.”
De la Pena was talking about himself in relation to the four demands, the university and the future. He talked without emotion, his thick eyebrows raised occasionally as a token of the seriousness of the subject.
“I feel that this is the most racist and conservative campus in Southern
California.” he said. “What I mean is that the people here think they are above and beyond other classes of people. I can feel it when T’m in lcass
fand I can feet it when I’m walking on campus. They think I’m a foreign student—they think I’m from India or something. And here I am an American citizen just like they are.”
De la Pena was bom an American 20 years ago in Long Beach. He grew up in East Los Angeles where he attended Garfield High School and East Los Angeles College. Then he came to USC to major in sociology. He is now a junior.
“I didn’t come here to defame or disrupt this school,” he said. “I came because it is challenging to open up this campus to more minority students.
This is basically what the demands presented by the two minority groups aim to do. The key demand is that the university provide funds for scholarships for 50 black and 50 brown students for the spring semester. De la Pena has indicated, however, that he will be satisfied for the time being with the 31 slots offered the two groups by the administration.
“I, for one. am not the type of militant that likes to slam the table.” he said. “I like to talk to people. My purpose here is not to scare the hell out of anybody. It is just to take care of the business of getting more minority students here.”
De la Pena has done a considerable amount of talking on this subject since he came to USC. One of the poeple he has talked with is Dr. Topping, who, as president, stands as the official and final representative of the administration.
“I realize the position Dr. Topping is in,” de la Pena said. “He has a very conservative and reactionary board of trustees which is hostile to any type of reform. But he himself is projecting an image that he’s more of a liberal.
“I don’t consider that Dr. Topping is ignorant. He’s one of the sharpest, calculating men I’ve ever met. A number of times we’ve gone into his office with the intentions of telling him something, and he’s gotten us going in circles. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the man.”
But de la Pena has not always been going in circles in his dealings with the president. In one of their meetings he said he “cut into him pretty bad,” and then walked out of the office.
“We took a stand on Dec. 13 and I made my position extremely clear,” de la Pena said. “I know that we can’t mess around any more with discussion. Some typy of progrsir has to be established.”
Ironically, on the same day the two groups called their news conference and came out with the demands, the administration made its offer.
“Since the Dec. 13 meeting we took the offer to our membership,” de la Pena said. “We decided to accept it with one stipulation That UMAS select the people who are to receive the scholarships. Too often the administration selects its own applicants.”
De la Pena said that he needed more members in the organization in order to be effective.
“I want to develop a base from which a group of minority students can develop more programs,” he said.
He is suspicious of all other forms of support other than from his own people.
“I’ve gone through this whole cycle at East L.A. College in trying to get demands accomplished,” he said. “And there I was fooled by support from the faculty.” He also feels that student support for the demands is limited to minority groups.
'if people want to say that this is not representative of all the students at USC then that’s right. I’m not talking about all the students. I’m talking about UMAS and that’s it.”
UMAS. he said, has not excluded other students from its meetings.
“In fact, we invited ASSC president Bil Mauk into one of our strategy meetings,” he said. “But he wanted to be ahistoricai and ride with the tide of change. He offered some support and then he revealed some of our plans to the administration. We’re kind of discouraged because we trusted him.”
De la Pena also criticized some of the white militants who, he says, try to capitalize on the minority feelings to create trouble.
“The real devils in this situation are the white radicals,” he said. “The guys who want total disruption. All we want is an equal break: an equal access to these institutions and a chance to have our little minority programs. They want total disruption, and at our expense.”
De la Pena did not forsee any easing of racial strain in the country’, whether white radicals lead or not.
“Within the year all hell is going to break loose,” he said. “A student in a race-relations class once asked me, ‘Why do we have to be sensitive to minority problems, why do we have to be sensitive to your needs and your demands?’ And I told him, ‘Simply because if you remain insensitive you’re not going to have a country.”
A HOLE—Work proceeds on a hole, formerly the faculty parking lot. A new law center is scheduled to rise on the site.
40 chosen to study in Urban Semester
Forty students have been selected to participate in the spring Urban Semester, USC’s unique urban studies program.
The program is now a permanent part of the curriculum.
The students are Glen R. Cass, Marc B. Geller. Jennifer Brackenbury, Lin Farley, Jeffrey White. Nancy E. Wint, William C. Reinsch, Clinton Mayers;
Stephanie N. Barger, Lynn Y. Hirai, Diane C. Ritchey, Suzanne M. DeBall, Andrew W. Buffmire, Russell K. Peterson, Celeste M. Ronnan;
Stephen W. Beidner, Jeffreda A. Curry, Edward R. Hurst, Miguel A. de la Pena. Damon Lawrence, Ronald E. McDuffie, Douglas T. Shinsato, Joseph Vasquez
Joel Rosenzweig, Albert F. Rush, Adina Lei Savin, Jerry Horn beak, Karin E. Kirksey, David P. O’Hara, Robert A. Linden, Sue E. Semple;
Sally M. Stone, Dennis Freidenrich, Warren W. Hewitt, John P. Walsh, David B. Goldstein, Mitzi Lewison, Ralph H. Lippman, John G. Orr, Margareta G. Ahlberg.
The students, men and women undergraduates, were selected for motivation and ability.
They will leave classrooms and traditional study outlines behind in their effort to learn about urban life. They will receive 16 units of credit for the semester.
Their laboratory will be the Southland megalopolis, and each will conduct a research project of his own choosing with faculty approval.
Faculty members represent several academic fields, ranging from sociology to architecture—offering the students as many instructional vantage points as possible through which to view urban existence.
The program is interdisciplinary, forsaking the traditional mode of several isolated subjects in the curriculum. In that sense, the city itself is curriculum and laboratory.
The nearly tutorial faculty-student ratio, with one professor for every three students, provides a framework in which students have available to them experts in several fields who function as consultants for their study efforts.
The Urban Semester, which was inaugurated at USC in the spring of 1968, and which was also conducted in the subsequent summer session, has been rated “highly successful” by students and faculty who participated.
The director of the program is Dr. David W. Martin, sociologist and professor of education.
The Urban Semester is conducted under the auspices of USC’s Institute of Urban Ecology, headed by Arthur A. Atkisson, Jr.
BLACK AMERICA FILMS CONTINUE
"Of Black America," the Experimental College film and discussion series, will continue tonight at 7:30 in Student Activities Center 205.
The film tonight is CBS' "The Heritage of Slavery." Panel members will be a member of the Urban League; Ron McDuffie, a member of the Black Student Union, and Wayne Howard, a member of Sigma Nu fraternity.
CAMPUS SURVEY
Students sound off on demands
By PAULA SCOLLICK
Student reaction to the demands submitted by the United Mexican American Students (UMAS) and Black Students Union (BSU), calling for admission and financial aid for 100 disadvantaged minority students, varied considerably in an informal poll taken on campus yesterday.
The majority of students opposing the demands reacted strongly when asked to give an opinion. A business student seemed to accurately sum up the reactions when he said. “I put myself through, so I’m not very happy with it. If the university will recognize a white students union with myself as president and recipient of full tuition remission. I’m all for it.”
Other students felt it was unfair for a minority, just because they are a minority, to receive partial treatment.
Marc Henfell, a graduate student in Asian studies, said, “It is not the school’s responsibility to provide cultural needs, it’s the family’s. As
far as the black studies program goes, it’s not even defined. If they’re talking about the Negro in the United States, the Sociology Department offers a course. And if it’s African culture, the American Negro is so far removed from that. If you’re going to have black and brown studies, why not have Polish or Swedish studies too,” he said.
Bruce Takii. a sophomore in prephvsical therapy, said all minorities and underprivileged should be included in th« program, not just Mexican-American and Negro students.
John Wallace, a junior in business, said, “1 don’t like it. No one has the right to make tliat kind of demand.” Two other students said that the UMAS and BSU had no business, demanding from a private school.
Russ Nordstrom, a senior in English, said. “The whole concept of a black studies program, i’m black and I'm proud,’ is a concept which indicates that these people are striving
for a racist identity. In Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, he wasn’t dreaming of a superior black people, but an integrated people.”
Tracy Vining, also a senior in English, said, “They are searching for a lost identity, and one or two classes is not going to give it to them, because it Is nonexistent.”
Many students did express approval of the idea of aiding minority students, but were uncertain about just what kind of program the UMAS and BSU had in mind. Art Herring, a graduate student, said he felt the demands had merit but none of them were very well developed as yet.
“I don’t think the demands are that harsh that something couldn’t be done about them, but some of these demands are for the spring semester and if they want it done properly, I’m wondering if that’s enough time,” 1 Jbbett Darragh, a freshman, said.
Shelia Williams, a junior in speech, thought the demands were fair, and many other students said they thought
the program was reasonable and should be fulfilled.
Tom Carroll, a junior majoring in history, said, “The idea is great, especially for this area, and I can’t think of any reason why they can’t be admitted to the university. I wouldn’t mind having a black or brown studies program. In fact, it’s really an opportunity for SC. People are always saying that if UCLA were situated here, it would already have done something to start orientating to the community.”
David Robles, a freshman majoring in math, said he didn’t see anything wrong with allowing scholarships, but he didn’t really know whetner a black or brown studies program was necessary.
Several students also emphasized that the demands should be met without violence or hostility. After all, said one student, “there’s no sense causing riots and strikes over something which really could be worked out.”
Oberlin wins debate meet in Hancock
By JOHN LANNAN
Oberlin College emerged victorious last night over 26 debate squads attending the First Annual Allan Nichols Invitational Debate Tournament hosted by the USC Debate team in Hancock Auditorium.
Oberlin became the first name to appear on the Allan Nichols Memorial Troptfy, a perpetual cup, when the Ohio debaters won a tight 5-4 decision over Michigan State in the finals of the three-day event.
The USC tournament is one of the three major western forensic events known nationally as the “Western Swing.” Customarily the sponsor school does not participate in its own tournament, but USC debaters did enter the other two. The Golden West Invitational at the University of Redlands and the UCLA Invitational. Both were held over Christmas.
J.R. Stein and Bill Anderson carried Troy’s hopes at UCLA, but fared rather poorly, losing to Cal State, Fullerton in the quarter finals.
In the Redlands event Stein, this time paired with Jco Edmiston, made it all the way to ttie finals, only to drop a 4-3 decision to the University of Houston, nationally considered the team to beat.
Freshman orators King Schofield and Dennis Winston were less fortunate, compiling a three-wins, five-losses record at Redlands.
The USl squad will play host again on Jan. 17 and 18 when the 33rd Annual USC High School Debate and Speech Tournament will be held on campus. A week later, on Jan. 23, 24, 25, the debaters will co-sponsor the Loyola-USC Winter Debate Tournament.
The debaters will be free to go on the road again next month and are considering a number of spring tournaments. Invitations have been extended by Northwestern, Harvard and Dartmouth and may be included in the squad’s eastern trip.
Photo by Jamie Baldwin
Court tells of unused ombudsman
By CHARLIE PETIT
USC students are not taking advantage of the Student Court in their efforts to deal with problems confronting them while living in the climate of a large and growing university, the court said yesterday.
The official statement released yesterday by the Student Court, said that one of the roles of the court is to act as an ombudsman for everyone in the university community.
“The job of an ombudsman is to investigate all the aspects of a reported problem which may exist between the various segments of the university,” the statement read.
Students were urged by the court to consult it if aat any time they are confused or disturbed by reasoning behind University policy.
The statement read, in part, “Without authority or access to information, the student is powerless to pursue his search for answers. The Student Court has sufficient authority in regard to investigatory procedures with access to the administration, faculty, and student groups. The court can make decisions and submit recommendations to the appropriate source as a neutral third party.”
Court members say that they are aware that the biggest barrier between students and the administration is red tape. They added that by more extensive use of the court, it is hoped that the individual can “have an impact on the university’s bureaucratic machinery.”
The ombudsman role would extend to investigation of the conduct of faculty members, if students so desire.
The specific jurisdiction of the court in these matters is to “render advisory opinions, effect decisions or arbitrate on intramural disputes involving recognized student organizations, councils, commission or committees,” the statement said.
Randy Noble, a court member, said that the ombudsman role has not been pursued by the court in the past.
The impetus for yesterday’s announcement grew out of an Idyllwild resolution calling for the establishment of some sort of ombudsman-type organization. The resulting investigation revealed that the Student Court already possesses the jurisdiction to undertake the function.
The court is not sure what the response to yesterday’s statement will be, but it is prepared to establish a full-time ombudsman if necessarv.
Students may submit questions and areas for investigation at the mailbox of the Student Court in the Student Activities Office in the YWCA building.
De la Pena: dedicated man
♦

MIKE DE LA PENA
By MIKE PARFIT Editor
Mike de la Pena, president of United Mexican-American Students, (UMAS), sat in a small back room in the annex to the Center for Social Action. Behind him a window looked out on a full parking lot. In front of him a clutter of papers lay on a battered desk. One of the documents was the list of demands presented to the administration by the Black Students Union and UMAS. He spoke in a tired monologue.
“I’ll tell you one thing,” he said. “I’m a brown racist. I’m prejudiced against all whites. I do not discriminate against them. Only when I feel that there is a mutual prejudice do I discriminate.
“I have faith and confidence in my people. I have an undying love for them and an undying will to organize them. I want to dedicate my life to working for my people.”
De la Pena was talking about himself in relation to the four demands, the university and the future. He talked without emotion, his thick eyebrows raised occasionally as a token of the seriousness of the subject.
“I feel that this is the most racist and conservative campus in Southern
California.” he said. “What I mean is that the people here think they are above and beyond other classes of people. I can feel it when T’m in lcass
fand I can feet it when I’m walking on campus. They think I’m a foreign student—they think I’m from India or something. And here I am an American citizen just like they are.”
De la Pena was bom an American 20 years ago in Long Beach. He grew up in East Los Angeles where he attended Garfield High School and East Los Angeles College. Then he came to USC to major in sociology. He is now a junior.
“I didn’t come here to defame or disrupt this school,” he said. “I came because it is challenging to open up this campus to more minority students.
This is basically what the demands presented by the two minority groups aim to do. The key demand is that the university provide funds for scholarships for 50 black and 50 brown students for the spring semester. De la Pena has indicated, however, that he will be satisfied for the time being with the 31 slots offered the two groups by the administration.
“I, for one. am not the type of militant that likes to slam the table.” he said. “I like to talk to people. My purpose here is not to scare the hell out of anybody. It is just to take care of the business of getting more minority students here.”
De la Pena has done a considerable amount of talking on this subject since he came to USC. One of the poeple he has talked with is Dr. Topping, who, as president, stands as the official and final representative of the administration.
“I realize the position Dr. Topping is in,” de la Pena said. “He has a very conservative and reactionary board of trustees which is hostile to any type of reform. But he himself is projecting an image that he’s more of a liberal.
“I don’t consider that Dr. Topping is ignorant. He’s one of the sharpest, calculating men I’ve ever met. A number of times we’ve gone into his office with the intentions of telling him something, and he’s gotten us going in circles. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the man.”
But de la Pena has not always been going in circles in his dealings with the president. In one of their meetings he said he “cut into him pretty bad,” and then walked out of the office.
“We took a stand on Dec. 13 and I made my position extremely clear,” de la Pena said. “I know that we can’t mess around any more with discussion. Some typy of progrsir has to be established.”
Ironically, on the same day the two groups called their news conference and came out with the demands, the administration made its offer.
“Since the Dec. 13 meeting we took the offer to our membership,” de la Pena said. “We decided to accept it with one stipulation That UMAS select the people who are to receive the scholarships. Too often the administration selects its own applicants.”
De la Pena said that he needed more members in the organization in order to be effective.
“I want to develop a base from which a group of minority students can develop more programs,” he said.
He is suspicious of all other forms of support other than from his own people.
“I’ve gone through this whole cycle at East L.A. College in trying to get demands accomplished,” he said. “And there I was fooled by support from the faculty.” He also feels that student support for the demands is limited to minority groups.
'if people want to say that this is not representative of all the students at USC then that’s right. I’m not talking about all the students. I’m talking about UMAS and that’s it.”
UMAS. he said, has not excluded other students from its meetings.
“In fact, we invited ASSC president Bil Mauk into one of our strategy meetings,” he said. “But he wanted to be ahistoricai and ride with the tide of change. He offered some support and then he revealed some of our plans to the administration. We’re kind of discouraged because we trusted him.”
De la Pena also criticized some of the white militants who, he says, try to capitalize on the minority feelings to create trouble.
“The real devils in this situation are the white radicals,” he said. “The guys who want total disruption. All we want is an equal break: an equal access to these institutions and a chance to have our little minority programs. They want total disruption, and at our expense.”
De la Pena did not forsee any easing of racial strain in the country’, whether white radicals lead or not.
“Within the year all hell is going to break loose,” he said. “A student in a race-relations class once asked me, ‘Why do we have to be sensitive to minority problems, why do we have to be sensitive to your needs and your demands?’ And I told him, ‘Simply because if you remain insensitive you’re not going to have a country.”
A HOLE—Work proceeds on a hole, formerly the faculty parking lot. A new law center is scheduled to rise on the site.
40 chosen to study in Urban Semester
Forty students have been selected to participate in the spring Urban Semester, USC’s unique urban studies program.
The program is now a permanent part of the curriculum.
The students are Glen R. Cass, Marc B. Geller. Jennifer Brackenbury, Lin Farley, Jeffrey White. Nancy E. Wint, William C. Reinsch, Clinton Mayers;
Stephanie N. Barger, Lynn Y. Hirai, Diane C. Ritchey, Suzanne M. DeBall, Andrew W. Buffmire, Russell K. Peterson, Celeste M. Ronnan;
Stephen W. Beidner, Jeffreda A. Curry, Edward R. Hurst, Miguel A. de la Pena. Damon Lawrence, Ronald E. McDuffie, Douglas T. Shinsato, Joseph Vasquez
Joel Rosenzweig, Albert F. Rush, Adina Lei Savin, Jerry Horn beak, Karin E. Kirksey, David P. O’Hara, Robert A. Linden, Sue E. Semple;
Sally M. Stone, Dennis Freidenrich, Warren W. Hewitt, John P. Walsh, David B. Goldstein, Mitzi Lewison, Ralph H. Lippman, John G. Orr, Margareta G. Ahlberg.
The students, men and women undergraduates, were selected for motivation and ability.
They will leave classrooms and traditional study outlines behind in their effort to learn about urban life. They will receive 16 units of credit for the semester.
Their laboratory will be the Southland megalopolis, and each will conduct a research project of his own choosing with faculty approval.
Faculty members represent several academic fields, ranging from sociology to architecture—offering the students as many instructional vantage points as possible through which to view urban existence.
The program is interdisciplinary, forsaking the traditional mode of several isolated subjects in the curriculum. In that sense, the city itself is curriculum and laboratory.
The nearly tutorial faculty-student ratio, with one professor for every three students, provides a framework in which students have available to them experts in several fields who function as consultants for their study efforts.
The Urban Semester, which was inaugurated at USC in the spring of 1968, and which was also conducted in the subsequent summer session, has been rated “highly successful” by students and faculty who participated.
The director of the program is Dr. David W. Martin, sociologist and professor of education.
The Urban Semester is conducted under the auspices of USC’s Institute of Urban Ecology, headed by Arthur A. Atkisson, Jr.
BLACK AMERICA FILMS CONTINUE
"Of Black America," the Experimental College film and discussion series, will continue tonight at 7:30 in Student Activities Center 205.
The film tonight is CBS' "The Heritage of Slavery." Panel members will be a member of the Urban League; Ron McDuffie, a member of the Black Student Union, and Wayne Howard, a member of Sigma Nu fraternity.
CAMPUS SURVEY
Students sound off on demands
By PAULA SCOLLICK
Student reaction to the demands submitted by the United Mexican American Students (UMAS) and Black Students Union (BSU), calling for admission and financial aid for 100 disadvantaged minority students, varied considerably in an informal poll taken on campus yesterday.
The majority of students opposing the demands reacted strongly when asked to give an opinion. A business student seemed to accurately sum up the reactions when he said. “I put myself through, so I’m not very happy with it. If the university will recognize a white students union with myself as president and recipient of full tuition remission. I’m all for it.”
Other students felt it was unfair for a minority, just because they are a minority, to receive partial treatment.
Marc Henfell, a graduate student in Asian studies, said, “It is not the school’s responsibility to provide cultural needs, it’s the family’s. As
far as the black studies program goes, it’s not even defined. If they’re talking about the Negro in the United States, the Sociology Department offers a course. And if it’s African culture, the American Negro is so far removed from that. If you’re going to have black and brown studies, why not have Polish or Swedish studies too,” he said.
Bruce Takii. a sophomore in prephvsical therapy, said all minorities and underprivileged should be included in th« program, not just Mexican-American and Negro students.
John Wallace, a junior in business, said, “1 don’t like it. No one has the right to make tliat kind of demand.” Two other students said that the UMAS and BSU had no business, demanding from a private school.
Russ Nordstrom, a senior in English, said. “The whole concept of a black studies program, i’m black and I'm proud,’ is a concept which indicates that these people are striving
for a racist identity. In Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, he wasn’t dreaming of a superior black people, but an integrated people.”
Tracy Vining, also a senior in English, said, “They are searching for a lost identity, and one or two classes is not going to give it to them, because it Is nonexistent.”
Many students did express approval of the idea of aiding minority students, but were uncertain about just what kind of program the UMAS and BSU had in mind. Art Herring, a graduate student, said he felt the demands had merit but none of them were very well developed as yet.
“I don’t think the demands are that harsh that something couldn’t be done about them, but some of these demands are for the spring semester and if they want it done properly, I’m wondering if that’s enough time,” 1 Jbbett Darragh, a freshman, said.
Shelia Williams, a junior in speech, thought the demands were fair, and many other students said they thought
the program was reasonable and should be fulfilled.
Tom Carroll, a junior majoring in history, said, “The idea is great, especially for this area, and I can’t think of any reason why they can’t be admitted to the university. I wouldn’t mind having a black or brown studies program. In fact, it’s really an opportunity for SC. People are always saying that if UCLA were situated here, it would already have done something to start orientating to the community.”
David Robles, a freshman majoring in math, said he didn’t see anything wrong with allowing scholarships, but he didn’t really know whetner a black or brown studies program was necessary.
Several students also emphasized that the demands should be met without violence or hostility. After all, said one student, “there’s no sense causing riots and strikes over something which really could be worked out.”
Oberlin wins debate meet in Hancock
By JOHN LANNAN
Oberlin College emerged victorious last night over 26 debate squads attending the First Annual Allan Nichols Invitational Debate Tournament hosted by the USC Debate team in Hancock Auditorium.
Oberlin became the first name to appear on the Allan Nichols Memorial Troptfy, a perpetual cup, when the Ohio debaters won a tight 5-4 decision over Michigan State in the finals of the three-day event.
The USC tournament is one of the three major western forensic events known nationally as the “Western Swing.” Customarily the sponsor school does not participate in its own tournament, but USC debaters did enter the other two. The Golden West Invitational at the University of Redlands and the UCLA Invitational. Both were held over Christmas.
J.R. Stein and Bill Anderson carried Troy’s hopes at UCLA, but fared rather poorly, losing to Cal State, Fullerton in the quarter finals.
In the Redlands event Stein, this time paired with Jco Edmiston, made it all the way to ttie finals, only to drop a 4-3 decision to the University of Houston, nationally considered the team to beat.
Freshman orators King Schofield and Dennis Winston were less fortunate, compiling a three-wins, five-losses record at Redlands.
The USl squad will play host again on Jan. 17 and 18 when the 33rd Annual USC High School Debate and Speech Tournament will be held on campus. A week later, on Jan. 23, 24, 25, the debaters will co-sponsor the Loyola-USC Winter Debate Tournament.
The debaters will be free to go on the road again next month and are considering a number of spring tournaments. Invitations have been extended by Northwestern, Harvard and Dartmouth and may be included in the squad’s eastern trip.
Photo by Jamie Baldwin
Court tells of unused ombudsman
By CHARLIE PETIT
USC students are not taking advantage of the Student Court in their efforts to deal with problems confronting them while living in the climate of a large and growing university, the court said yesterday.
The official statement released yesterday by the Student Court, said that one of the roles of the court is to act as an ombudsman for everyone in the university community.
“The job of an ombudsman is to investigate all the aspects of a reported problem which may exist between the various segments of the university,” the statement read.
Students were urged by the court to consult it if aat any time they are confused or disturbed by reasoning behind University policy.
The statement read, in part, “Without authority or access to information, the student is powerless to pursue his search for answers. The Student Court has sufficient authority in regard to investigatory procedures with access to the administration, faculty, and student groups. The court can make decisions and submit recommendations to the appropriate source as a neutral third party.”
Court members say that they are aware that the biggest barrier between students and the administration is red tape. They added that by more extensive use of the court, it is hoped that the individual can “have an impact on the university’s bureaucratic machinery.”
The ombudsman role would extend to investigation of the conduct of faculty members, if students so desire.
The specific jurisdiction of the court in these matters is to “render advisory opinions, effect decisions or arbitrate on intramural disputes involving recognized student organizations, councils, commission or committees,” the statement said.
Randy Noble, a court member, said that the ombudsman role has not been pursued by the court in the past.
The impetus for yesterday’s announcement grew out of an Idyllwild resolution calling for the establishment of some sort of ombudsman-type organization. The resulting investigation revealed that the Student Court already possesses the jurisdiction to undertake the function.
The court is not sure what the response to yesterday’s statement will be, but it is prepared to establish a full-time ombudsman if necessarv.
Students may submit questions and areas for investigation at the mailbox of the Student Court in the Student Activities Office in the YWCA building.
De la Pena: dedicated man
♦